It had been a while since we had a major, high-profile mass shooting, and I was feeling like we were due. Generally speaking, I try not to make hay out of these things, out of respect for the dead. We can argue out the policy implications later. Things we can be sure about:
- Almost everything the media will say in the first several hours will be wrong.
- Gun sales will shoot back up again, as people scared of more gun control begin stockpiling again.
- President Obama has already used the incident as a call for more gun control. This was predictable.
- This will be used by mindless partisans to score cheap points against one another.
- Our opponents in the gun control will be using the incident to push their agenda before even all the facts are known. They will place the blame squarely on people like us.
Given this incident is high-profile, we have to be concerned about copycats. We are living in an increasingly ill country. Given the shooter’s age, I’m going to guess he was cuckoo for cocopuffs, and the racist stuff was part of his delusions. I kind of hope this is the case, because I can’t imagine what a monster someone would have to be to sit in a church for an hour with other people, the whole time thinking about killing them, and then follow through on your horrific plans. If he’s just a run of the mill sociopath, that’s a mad dog that needs to be put down, and I say that as someone skeptical about capital punishment.
Already got an email from the Brady’s calling for more restrictions. At least they didn’t ask for $9 in donations.
Church’s are a concealed carry no-no in SC, I believe. I wonder if that will change.
I wouldn’t bet on it.
Really? And that didn’t stop him?!?!?
Honestly tho my first reaction was “S. Carolina? Nobody else had a gun on them in S. Carolina? It’s not exactly a liberal cesspool like alot of states down there. Why wasn’t somebody else armed?”, guess it makes some sense if it’s against the law there. Stupid law I would ignore but that’s beside the point.
It’s been pointed out that in SC there’s no blanket prohibition on carry in churches. It is legal if church officials give their permission for people to carry in the building/facilities.
But, this pastor reportedly was an ardent supporter of “gun control”, so….
That said, it bears pointing out that laws prohibiting carry in places of worship are common in the South. I’d expect any “copycat” incidents to occur in places with similar laws.
I’d ask the pastor before coming and if refused mention I won’t be there putting my money in the collection and will go somewhere else for my ministry. I’d also remind him about the passage for selling your cloak to buy a sword and let him stew on that. There are a lot of false teachers out there and pacifism and gun control are not Godly virtues. Defending innocent life is what God likes.
The stance of the pastor cost the lives of others since no one was armed to stop it apparently. So much for caring for the flock.
Agreed! I admit to being challenged by the forgiveness offered the murderer by his victims’ families. I would hope some day to be so Christ-like. But how much more Christ-like if, as sheep in the midst of wolves, we become shrewd as serpents while innocent as doves (Matthew 10:16) by being prepared to stop such tragedies in the first place by having a good guy with a gun.
Respectfully,
Arnie
To clarify what Archer wrote, the law in South Carolina specifically prohibits carry within religious institutions “…unless express permission is given by the appropriate church official or governing body;”
In other words, if you don’t have a permission slip from the church then you’re not permitted to carry there. As Archer notes, the “appropriate church official or governing body” appears to have been ardently anti-gun, so the likelihood that any congregants were issued the necessary permission is extremely unlikely.
Indeed. The AME is considerably liberal and anti-gun. I do however admit to admiration for their willingness to forgive such a horrible offense. I’m not there yet. – Arnie
But I want to get there!
I’m not sure I see that this will move the needle much. Lotta hot air will be produced, but that’s about it. I’d expect the parents to get sued, if the firearm was a gift (as reports are indicating); which may or may not get interesting.
Last report I heard had changed to say that the pistol was not a gift, but was purchased by the shooter using money obtained as a gift.
Whether it was a private sale or a retail one hasn’t been released/reported.
I still expect the parents to get sued, but if they didn’t directly provide the pistol, I wouldn’t expect any legal actions to get very far.
He had a pending felony case against him, after being arrested in Lexington county on March 3.
The .45 caliber pistol that he used to commit the shooting was given to him by his Father for his birthday in April.
If this is true, then the Father violated Federal law, 18USC922(d):
I don’t see how more gun control would have stopped this. This is actually an illustration of what we are facing: a law is proposed that won’t work to stop shootings, but disarms honest people. The law fails when yet another incident happens, and then that failure is used to propose yet another law that will not work, rinse and repeat.
Shocker – people don’t follow the law. If that’s the case, then I’m going to have no sympathy when the inevitable civil suit comes down. It will be interesting if the feds prosecute that, though. IF they do, it’s an admission that the current laws forbade the gift.
Other than for the few usual suspects (like Obama) saying what they are expected to say, I have actually been surprised from the samples I’ve seen how many spokesmen on he left have been saying that gun control will never solve these kinds of problems. Of course they aren’t saying they would oppose gun control, but at least they aren’t saying it would be a panacea.
“Given the shooter’s age, I’m going to guess he was cuckoo for cocopuffs, and the racist stuff was part of his delusions.”
I observed that he used the middle name “Storm,” as in “Stormfront,” “Volkstorm,” etc. Since that is a somewhat unusual name, I’m guessing for now that unless he changed his name himself, his parents gave it to him, and his racist bag may be hereditary. Often when you inherit a delusion, it opens the doors for acquiring more on your own.
There’s also that *if* it pans out that the pistol was a gift from father to son.
Well… aren’t immediate family transfers exempt from a lot of UCB laws? Including the proposed Toomey-Manchin?
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/419998/none-obamas-own-gun-control-proposals-have-anything-do-todays-shooting-charles-c-w
I can see totally see them push for a law that exempts this situation while ignoring that the transfer was illegal under current law.
Though now the news is saying it was bought himself… at an FFL.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/06/19/us/charleston-church-shooting-main/index.html
(It looks like the confusion was that he bougth it using “birthdaymoney”).
Which is also… not covered by a UBC law…
Again this is why one has to wait before the facts come in.
But that’s not stoping the President.
So they will go back to UBC’s and probably try to push that handgun licensing scheme the traitors to there oath in CT are pushing which we all know is handgun registration, even harder.
The blood dancing will come quick enough. It’s already being done by obama and hitlery. They are weasel wording it but we all know what’s coming out the side of there mouth.